when does the greed stop?

[Linken.6345]

19 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Sure, except why would you assume Anet wouldn't also make gemt o gold conversion available if the exchange didn't exist? That's a pretty contrived crystal ball kind of argument right there, especially considering Anet IS interested in selling gems. 

It is pretty simple really it is to combat gold inflation in the game.

If Anet sold new gold minted by them, instead of gold made by players for gems the trading post would look like world of warcrafts trading post.

Do we want to pay 35 gold for 1 tier 6 leather?

No no we do not.

And you wanted an example on how Anet indirectly make money by the exchange.

Lets say there is 250 bucks of gems on the exchange and 250 gold.

A player see ooh a deal I can get 25 gems for 25 gold procedes to buy it.

There is now 225 gems in the trading post and 270 gold since Anet take a tax of 5 gold.

Player B see a deal and buy  gem card for 50 gems for their cash the procedes to buy 30 golds for 25 gems

Now there is 250 gems and 235 gold in the exchange again since Anet take a 5 gold tax.

So this way people are insetiviced to buy gems for cash to exchange to gold

by the people buying gems with their in game gold instead of them selling it to real money traders.

 

[Obtena.7952]

1 hour ago, Gibson.4036 said:

But the amount sold increases with the demand for gold->gems. Therefore the demand makes ANet money.

Sure, but the revenue isn't generated there. It's generated at the time when people buy the gems. 

Let's take a step back. This discussion started because someone claimed that people exchanging gold for gems has value to Anet in 'engagement' currency which was their attempt to justify moving away from the GS as a business model. Of course, that's pretty absurd because the model works but the indication that this 'engagement' had some monetary value to Anet comparable to real money revenue ... again, completely absurd.

That's why it's important to be accurate about what revenue is and when Anet gets it. The reasons for it's generation have nothing to do with WHEN it's created. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

10 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

It is pretty simple really it is to combat gold inflation in the game.

If Anet sold new gold minted by them, instead of gold made by players for gems the trading post would look like world of warcrafts trading post.

Do we want to pay 35 gold for 1 tier 6 leather?

No no we do not.

Sure ... except this thread isn't about inflation so ?

10 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

And you wanted an example on how Anet indirectly make money by the exchange.

I can't recall asking for such examples. I'm sure there are some. I think the fact that numerous revenues that can be linked to the exchange are indirect ... is a pretty strong indication that supports what I'm saying.  

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Zok.4956]

1 hour ago, Gibson.4036 said:

I own a bar. I offer free drinks to women because when they come, more men show up and buy drinks.
But I'm not making any money due to the women coming to my bar?

You are mixing things up.

Of course the women do not make you money. They cost you money (the costs of the drinks they drink). These are costs of sales/marketing and "free drinks for women" is your marketing/sales campaign.

Of course, you do this sales/marketing campaign because you hope that as a result you generate more sales from men that not only compensate your marketing costs, but overall increase sales and as a result your profits.

And like with every marketing campaign, it can work, or maybe it doesn't. Maybe the bar next door is doing the same campaign but has fancier and more manly drinks.  With the latter, you would have less profit than without “free drinks for women”.

 

1 hour ago, Gibson.4036 said:

Except changes in the demand for gold -> gems changes how many people are buying gem cards. People aren't buying cards to throw them away. They're buying them for gem items, and more of them if it's worth it to get gold.

Anet could offer customers to buy gold with gems without having to offer the other way (buying gems with gold).

Anet could set this up with a fixed price or with a mathematical formula that has some variation (time limited offers and price changes  can increase sales).

Anet maybe (or maybe not) would sell more gems with this, because the "gold barons" could not buy gems with gold and also had to buy gems with real money.

To create a two-way (gold->gem, gem->gold) exchange is not a natural law, but purely Anets decision. It is not a real, physical exchange, that is just our imagination. It is just a few bits in software.

So, buying gold with gems (no matter if the other way gold->gems exists or not) does not earn Anet money. It it just a way (one of many) of creating demand for buying gems with real money. Because with those real money gem sales Anet earns money.

 

1 hour ago, Gibson.4036 said:

They didn't put the exchange in the game for happy feels. They did it because there was a return to be had.

That's a strawman fallacy. Because I did not argue, that they do it for "happy feels". I even gave you one  important reason (there are more) why they did it.

The "gem->gold" direction is of course to increase demand for buying gems with real money.
The "gold->gem" direction has legal reasons. And could also work as a gold sink. and it has a psychological component.  etc. etc.

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Zok.4956

[Linken.6345]

42 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Sure ... except this thread isn't about inflation so ?

I can't recall asking for such examples. I'm sure there are some. I think the fact that numerous revenues that can be linked to the exchange are indirect ... is a pretty strong indication that supports what I'm saying.  

 

So this post is not asking what I made and example of?

The Gems people buy with in game gold is already bought with cash by someone else to then turned into gold before.

And the more people that buy gems with in game gold the higher value other players get for the cash bought gems turned into gold so then then said players spend cash to buy gems again and the circle continues.

They even dip further by taxing it both ways aswell.

3 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Snip

Define 'indirect' revenue? How is any money generated for Anet for a transaction between players where no money is involved and where there is missed opportunity for Anet to sell gems? Like, where does this money come from? You're trying to claim there are positive indirect effects to Anet's revenue from that exchange? How could you in good faith make that claim? 

Snip

[Obtena.7952]

43 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

So this post is not asking what I made and example of?

The Gems people buy with in game gold is already bought with cash by someone else to then turned into gold before.

OK ... that doesn't mean conversion generates revenue. 

43 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

And the more people that buy gems with in game gold the higher value other players get for the cash bought gems turned into gold so then then said players spend cash to buy gems again and the circle continues.

They even dip further by taxing it both ways aswell.

Great, so we can agree that conversion doesn't make revenue for Anet because AGAIN, it's not relevant what the reasons are people by gems. This whole discussion about where the revenue generation exists is because someone insisted "engagement" from people converting gold to gems was some sort of payment comparable to actual revenue for Anet when it's absolutely not. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Linken.6345]

16 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

OK ... that doesn't mean conversion generates revenue. 

Great, so we can agree that conversion doesn't make revenue for Anet because AGAIN, it's not relevant what the reasons are people by gems. This whole discussion about where the revenue generation exists is because someone insisted "engagement" from people converting gold to gems was some sort of payment comparable to actual revenue for Anet when it's absolutely not. 

It do since the people who buy gems to turn to gold wont do it if they dont feel its worth it.

A player buying gems with ingame gold dont take any revenue from Anet since the gems have already been paid for.

It dont matter if it was paid for 1 hour or a week ago it was already money in Anets pocket so still revenue.

[Obtena.7952]

32 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

A player buying gems with ingame gold dont take any revenue from Anet since the gems have already been paid for.

That's not true because there is certainly a proportion of players that would have used RL money if they didn't have the Gold available to buy gems. I don't know how many, but I know it's not zero so therefore, I know Anet is missing out on revenues by making GS items available with conversion for this portion of players. But it's sort of a moot point anyways because the main points is .... 

32 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

It dont matter if it was paid for 1 hour or a week ago it was already money in Anets pocket so still revenue.

That's right ... that's exactly my point ... the revenue is generated at the time of gem purchase. The fact that Anet got that revenue BEFORE a player did any spending with the gems means it was NOT generated when they eventually use the gems. It was generated when they made the purchase. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[IndigoSundown.5419]

Before we could have an informed discussion about the impact on gems > gold and gold > gems on ANet's revenue, we would need information that ANet does not provide, like how much.

The two most important unknown numbers are: the size of the group which doesn't spend cash now, but would absent the exchange; and the size of the group who would not change their cash spending if gold were not available via gems   Even ANet doesn't know those numbers, because they are hypothetical.

Bottom line, though, is, "Why did ANet put the exchange in?"  The answer is likely money, which is almost always the answer when you ask why a business does anything.  I believe they bet that they could get money out of players with more money than time by allowing players with more time than money to farm gold.

Sure, the degree to which that scenario would be good for revenue depends on whether the gold providers would spend cash if the exchange didn't exist.  However, if you consider human nature, the gold farmers are more likely to be people that don't want to  or can't spend money.  Also, it seems likely that a large number of those who now buy gems specifically to get gold, would not buy those gems absent the exchange.

So, we don't know, we aren't going to know, but if ANet knew what they were doing, the exchange is a net positive for them.  So maybe, the question to ask is, "Do you think ANet knew/knows what they were/are doing?"

Edited June 2, 2023 by IndigoSundown.5419

[ugrakarma.9416]

3 minutes ago, IndigoSundown.5419 said:

However, if you consider human nature, the gold farmers are more likely to be people that don't want to  or can't spend money.  Also, it seems likely that a large number of those who now buy gems specifically to get gold, who would not buy those gems absent the exchange.

not so so, theres ppl like me, that are gold farmer, and spend money, i just like use money to buy exclusive cash shop items.

and gold to only game items,,, thats feel more like a "prize".

when the grass isn't too green for me, then i farm gold.

theres also lots of ppl where even if they don't need it, they have a monthly quota for buying gems. as a kind of thanks to the game, there was a time when I had a goal of buying at least 2k gems per month.

[ugrakarma.9416]

its all a win win for Anet.Gold farmers only, that refuse to buy cash, make the game active playing, and are also suppliers of stuff by selling materials gear.

Cashiers buy the stuff that ppl have to sell. 

Also by creating items that are not cash shop, but rarier like infusions, they give something to make cash shopers buy gold.

So the entire ecosystem is fine.

[Zok.4956]

11 hours ago, Linken.6345 said:

A player buying gems with ingame gold dont take any revenue from Anet since the gems have already been paid for.

It dont matter if it was paid for 1 hour or a week ago

Do you really believe, that Anet maintains a real inventory of gems (that could run empty in theory) and that you get the gems you buy with gold come from this inventory? And that the gems someone uses to buy gold (or BL skins or whatever) are added to this inventory?

Do you then also believe that Anet maintains a real inventory of every BL-skin in the Gemshop that you can buy in the Gemshop? And if you buy a BL-skin in the Gemshop you get one item from Anets Gemshop inventory of this BL-skin? Like with real physical items, i.e. when you buy a pair of shoes in RL?

Why would Anet want to create the overhead of maintaining such a system when there is a software solution with less overhead and less development costs that looks exactly the same to the outside, because these are all virtual items and destroying/consuming/creating them costs nothing internally?

So, if you buy gems with gold I don't think you get gems that someone else bought with real money sometime before.  You simply get a gem number credited to your account and the gold number is debited from your account. So at this moment gems are virtually created and gold is deleted/consumed. That's also how a gold sink works.

 

[Cuks.8241]

18 minutes ago, Zok.4956 said:

Do you really believe, that Anet maintains a real inventory of gems (that could run empty in theory) and that you get the gems you buy with gold come from this inventory? And that the gems someone uses to buy gold (or BL skins or whatever) are added to this inventory?

Do you then also believe that Anet maintains a real inventory of every BL-skin in the Gemshop that you can buy in the Gemshop? And if you buy a BL-skin in the Gemshop you get one item from Anets Gemshop inventory of this BL-skin? Like with real physical items, i.e. when you buy a pair of shoes in RL?

Why would Anet want to create the overhead of maintaining such a system when there is a software solution with less overhead and less development costs that looks exactly the same to the outside, because these are all virtual items and destroying/consuming/creating them costs nothing internally?

So, if you buy gems with gold I don't think you get gems that someone else bought with real money sometime before.  You simply get a gem number credited to your account and the gold number is debited from your account. So at this moment gems are virtually created and gold is deleted/consumed. That's also how a gold sink works.

 

I don't really know how the system works. I think its highly likely the prices are regulated by Anet. But not necessarily and  there is also a component of supply/demand in there. Because the price fluctuates based on the demand. https://www.gw2tp.com/gems You can see how much the price changed over the years.

You can also play with the number of gems/gold you will buy and the price per gem (or gold) changes. I never did this actually (so am not 100% sure) but saw some guides. Which means not every gem/gold on the market has the same price at a given time. 

The author of this video seem to think it is a pure unregulated exchange between players. But hes probably only assuming. 

 

[Vayne.8563]

On 5/27/2023 at 1:51 AM, Gravitron.7982 said:

It sounds like it, because the way I described it is reality. I described it exactly how it is in real life. 

Free Players = lower power level
Paid players = higher power level

It's pretty clear cut I think. 

It would be pretty clear cut if every word in the English language was interpreted literally in every occassion. But since language doesn't work that way, it's not clear cut.

There are expressions in English that mean different things in different countries or even different parts of the same country.

Pay to win was a term created at a very specific time for a very specific purpose. That purpose was to tell you if you don't keep spending money on a constant basis in the cash shop, you're at a disadvantage. There are plenty of games like that. You don't get to move the bar, just because you want to take a literal interpretation of a phrase, instead of learning it's meaning.

On the other hand, expansions never counted in pay to win. WoW was never called a pay to win game by anyone I know anyway. Yet every time an expansion comes out for WoW, you go up in both levels and power. And since WoW has PvP that is gear dependent as well as open world PvP, one could say, by your definition that WoW is pay to win.

In fact, I can't think of any MMOs by your definition that wouldn't be pay to win. Those that buy expansions get higiher levels and therefore more power. And if every MMO is pay to win, than there's no point in having the word at all. It's a useless, meaningless phrase...unless you use it the way it was intended.

Pay to win never included expansions. Shrugs.

[ShadowCatz.8437]

On 5/24/2023 at 1:25 PM, costepj.5120 said:

Have you actually played WvW? It's well known to be the least rewarding game mode in terms of loot.

Compared with PvE where the only issue you might have is your teams (party/squad in raids, fractal etc) performance and possible bugs. In WvW you hvae to deal with which servers you get placed with (as in linked) and have to deal with two server (which also might be linked together with another server).

That make a steady flow of Gold and loot less compared to only playing PvE content.

@costepj.5120 I don't disagree with your, but I am trying to explain that view that OP posted is a bit short sighted.

[Linken.6345]

6 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

Do you really believe, that Anet maintains a real inventory of gems (that could run empty in theory) and that you get the gems you buy with gold come from this inventory? And that the gems someone uses to buy gold (or BL skins or whatever) are added to this inventory?

Snip

 

No I never said they do.

But its not hard for them to have 2 numbers namely total gems spent on gold nr1 and total gold spent on gems nr2.

And theen regulate the exhange based on how big each one is to eachother.

Ofcourse this is not saying they do this but that is how the gem that can be bought for gold pools was explained back in the day.

When it empties people have to buy more gems with real cash and exchange for gold not spend in the store.

Thay would also explain why STO have a problem with their Zen exhange  to few people buy Zen with real money so people with ingame coin cant exchange.

[Zzik.5873]

On 5/24/2023 at 9:47 AM, Holmindeboks.3490 said:

yes i am sure i quoted the right post, but what bothers me is, gw2, WoW, hearthstone and call of duty all games are a disaster. hearthstone has trash rng and bad matchmaking, the game is full of losers who play mage so i quit the game, call of duty is full of camper losers, also quit the game, in wow i made 300k gold within a few days. and in gw2 i want so many nice items, but if i buy all i have zero gold, it's hard to make gold in gw2. and the easy get rich items never drop. this is ridiculous, irl everything gets more expensive every few weeks. and then virtual skins wont change. i just want 1 item drop thats worth a few thousand and it makes me happy for the game again, but as long as i waste time for treasure mushroom and others without the item i want my hate gets bigger and bigger. i think i go buy diablo 4, maybe my luck is better there. 

I dont know the gold value in wow. But in guild wars 2 a fiew thousand gold is huuuuuuuge. The most expensive item in the game are like between 10k and 20k. You can have a ready endgame character for less than 100 gold. 200 to 300 gold if you want best in slot. And if you go for the omega god armor, wich is legendary, youll have it for like 3k. Maybe your perception of value in gw2 is wrong? I think an account cant even hold more than 99k gold.

[azorean.1850]

NEVEEEER!!!!

[Burnfall.9573]

On 5/31/2023 at 4:01 PM, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, here is where the reality hits ... whether GW2 as a business is successful or not is not based on what you believe is a problem with it's business model. The fact that it's been around for over 10 years with this business model and is still pumping out new content speaks much more to it's success and how it's NOT a problem for it's customer based than what any individual thinks.

The fact is that as long as enough of the market patronizes Anet with purchases to make the business sustainable, then the people that don't like how GW2 works as a business (and likely don't buy gems) simply aren't necessary to make GW2 part of that sustainable business. 

You simply don't understand the business-customer interaction. It's not going to cater to you, especially if it's successful doing what it does. 

I am in complete agreement with your posts. I have nothing more to add.

[robertthebard.8150]

On 5/25/2023 at 2:03 PM, Gravitron.7982 said:

Getting gear by buying gems and converting it to gold used to buy exotics off the Trader, is easier than farming said gold or gear. 

Let me know when you can buy that gear off the GS?  You see, the problem with this analysis is that the gear you're buying, was earned by the person selling it in game.  They didn't buy it from the GS and then list it.  Someone that's really efficient at farming up gold w/out the GS can get the same gear, for the same prices, and never touch their wallet.

I played an old Korean Grinder called Rappelz, and there, you could enchant your gear to +20.  However, if you failed on an enchantment, the item was broken, and the only way to fix it, an item called e-repair, was available only from the cash shop.  Items to prevent the gear from breaking could also be purchased from the cash shop.  A player in full +20 gear had a very distinct advantage over everyone else, thus, P2W.  There's nothing even remotely similar here.

[Gravitron.7982]

18 minutes ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Let me know when you can buy that gear off the GS?  You see, the problem with this analysis is that the gear you're buying, was earned by the person selling it in game.  They didn't buy it from the GS and then list it.  Someone that's really efficient at farming up gold w/out the GS can get the same gear, for the same prices, and never touch their wallet.

I played an old Korean Grinder called Rappelz, and there, you could enchant your gear to +20.  However, if you failed on an enchantment, the item was broken, and the only way to fix it, an item called e-repair, was available only from the cash shop.  Items to prevent the gear from breaking could also be purchased from the cash shop.  A player in full +20 gear had a very distinct advantage over everyone else, thus, P2W.  There's nothing even remotely similar here.

How long does it take them to farm enough gold to buy a full set of gear? Because I know how long it takes me to earn enough money to buy that much gold, and for me it's pretty fast. 

[IAmNotMatthew.1058]

8 hours ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

How long does it take them to farm enough gold to buy a full set of gear? 

About half an hour. 

[robertthebard.8150]

9 hours ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

How long does it take them to farm enough gold to buy a full set of gear? Because I know how long it takes me to earn enough money to buy that much gold, and for me it's pretty fast. 

...and what good is that going to do if nobody's crafting it for you to buy?  A P2W system isn't reliant on players providing items crafted in game, you just go to the cash shop and buy them, or the means to upgrade them.

[costepj.5120]

10 hours ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

Because I know how long it takes me to earn enough money to buy that much gold, and for me it's pretty fast. 

The natural extension of your argument is that by working extra hours, you can afford to employ someone to play GW2 for you, saving you the hassle. Maybe you can work weekends too and pay someone to play other games for you?

[Trejgon.9367]

On 6/2/2023 at 1:39 PM, Zok.4956 said:

Do you really believe, that Anet maintains a real inventory of gems (that could run empty in theory) and that you get the gems you buy with gold come from this inventory?

Yes, the (former now) AN employee that designed the system, have went out on reddit somewhere in like 2013/2014 and explicitelly explained that this is how this system work. as for "running empty in theory" the automatice price scaling runs on geometric formula, scaling in a way that you would need to spend near-infinite amount of gold to buy out that last gem - but if it was last gem to make, then selling gems for gold would also give ludicrous amount of gold, so people would be extremely encouraged to buy gems to sell for gold.

here is a link to exact post: you can verify the author of this post on your own.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/2xtjc7/comment/cp3gd2a/